Ethics "Upfront": Generating an Organizational Framework for a New University of Technology

A powerful set of projections has constructed post-apartheid higher education in South Africa. Among these is the expectation that technikons (institutions similar to the British polytechnics) would become universities of technology, with a mission to drive the technology of national reconstruction and development. In this paper, one of the new universities of technology serves as a case study to explore organizational structure and to highlight the ethics of university management and leadership. Building a new university provides the opportunity to place ethics "upfront", rather than as an afterthought, by constructing an organizational framework that makes ethical issues integral to management and decision-making processes. In imagining the structure of a university of technology, the authors were inspired by future scripting methods developed by Bastiaan De Laat, and by Duncan Den Boer, Arie Rip and Sandra Speller. The research process firstly involved the identification of themes related to values and ethics through an analysis of the environment. These themes were incorporated into three scenarios of possible futures for this new university type. Using these scenarios, the ethical issues that emerged (according to how the university of technology might choose to organise itself), are compared with the original themes. Conclusions are then drawn with regard to management structures that are hierarchical and entrench compliance, or that are traditionally collegiate and expertise-based, or that might enable mutual appreciation and allow for leaders to emerge within any functional space at a university of technology.

Controversies as Informal Technology A ssessment

Controversies, especially those that surround "early warnings" about impacts of a technology or a large project, may be welcomed as an informal way of technology assessment. This is not always recognized, because of ideals of consensus and context-free rationality. An alternative, rhetorical perspective is presented on controversies and their sociocognitive dynamics, in which interests and actor-strategies play an integral role besides arguments and evidence. Because of such interactions, articulation of insights and positions occurs, that is, social learning. Improvement of social learning has to take the sociocognitive dynamics into account. Absolute standards and methods are impossible, but one can take robustness of views as a realistic goal.

Narrative Infrastructure in Product Creation Processes

In product creation processes, perhaps even more than in organization processes in general, uncertainties are addressed and complexity is reduced. In retrospect, linearized success stories are told. The history of a product innovation in a biotechnology firm is used to show how actually, over time, attributions and typifications in stories, and the implied stories contained in interactions, link up and an overall plot emerges. Such a social-semiotic analysis identifies the narrative infrastructure which enables, as well as constrains, further actions, just like narrative enables and constrains the characters involved. In the specific `genre' of product creation processes, the role of `hero' shifts from the project team to the emerging product itself. Managers and other actors involved can profit from the reflexive understanding offered by social-semiotic analysis, and avoid becoming captive of the path they follow, even though reflexivity may hinder the build-up of thrust in the process.

The past and future of RRI

Within the space of a few years, the idea of Responsible Research and Innovation, and its acronym RRI, catapulted from an obscure phrase to the topic of conferences and attempts to specify and realize it. How did this come about, and against which backdrop? What are the dynamics at present, and what do these imply for the future of RRI as a discourse, and as a patchwork of practices? It is a social innovation which creates opening in existing (and evolving) divisions of moral labour, a notion that is explained with the help of the history of responsibility language. It is filled in for the present situation and ongoing developments. Some elements may stabilize and this creates a path into the future. There will be reductions of the originally open-ended innovation, some productive, others less so. This is a reason to regularly inquire into the value of the reductions and the directions the path is taking.

Constructing productive engagement: pre-engagement tools for emerging technologies

Engagement with stakeholders and civil society is increasingly important for new scientific and technological developments. Preparation of such engagements sets the stage for engagement activities and thus contributes to their outcomes. Preparation is a demanding task, particularly if the facilitating agent aims for timely engagement related to emerging technologies. Requirements for such preparation include understanding of the emerging science & technology and its dynamics. Multi-level analysis and socio-technical scenarios are two complementary tools for constructing productive engagement. Examination of the emergence of nanotechnologies in the food packaging sector demonstrates how these tools work. In light of recent policy demands for responsible innovation, but also more generally, the role of organizers of engagement activities is one that deserves reflection insofar as it can extend beyond that of preparation and facilitation.

Entanglement of Imaging and Imagining of Nanotechnology

Images, ranging from visualizations of the nanoscale to future visions, abound within and beyond the world of nanotechnology. Rather than the contrast between imaging, i.e. creating images that are understood as offering a view on what is out there, and imagining, i.e. creating images offering impressions of how the nanoscale could look like and images presenting visions of worlds that might be realized, it is the entanglement between imaging and imagining which is the key to understanding what images do. Three main arenas of entanglement of imag(in)ing and the tensions involved are discussed: production practices and use of visualizations of the nanoscale; imag(in)ing the future and the present; and entanglements of nanoscience and art. In these three arenas one sees struggles about which images might stand for nanotechnology, but also some stabilization of the entanglement of imag(in)ing, for example in established rules in the practices of visualizing the nanoscale. Three images have become iconic, through the combination of their wide reception and further circulation. All three, the IBM logo, the Foresight Institute's Nanogear image, and the so-called Nanolouse, depict actual or imagined technoscientific objects and are thus seen as representing technoscientific achievements - while marking out territory.

Science policy advisory councils in France, the Netherlands and the United States, 1957-77: a comparative analysis

The evolution of high-level science advisory councils in France, the Netherlands and the United States is reviewed in the light of common trends in the relationship of science and government over the past twenty years The creation of the councils came as a response to similar needs of governments m the domestic and international spheres. The subsequent decline of the advisory councils in all three countries is attributable to the 'bureaucratization' of science policy-making, a slower rate of growth in R&D expenditure, a more goal-oriented approach in governments' sponsorship, changing public attitudes towards science and technology, and the intrinsic difficulties faced by the council members in acting both as scientists and as political advisors. The revitalization of the councils in the mid-1970s was similarly inspired by emerging needs and institutional developments affecting all three governments In turn, the distinctive features of each council derive from underlying differences in political organization and culture. These differences are revealed in governmental conceptions of science policy; in the role played by scientists in public affairs; and in the organization of scientific and technological interests in political decision-making.